1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Witch Hunt: Newspaper publishes Google Map of NY Gun Permit Owners

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by John828, Dec 24, 2012.

  1. berettaprofessor

    berettaprofessor Well-Known Member

    If you haven't seen it, there's a nice response to the problem here:

    <link removed>

    This guy posted not only the names, addresses and phone numbers of the writer, editor, and publisher, he included pictures, and links to facebook pages of those individuals AND THE ENTIRE NEWSPAPER STAFF!

    This is a great lesson in democracy, folks!
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 26, 2012
  2. MilsurpShooter

    MilsurpShooter Well-Known Member

    The talking heads on TV are beginning to discuss this story, all the 1st ammendment people saying it's public record and if you don't want your information out there then you shouldn't apply for a permit. Any of your neighbors can fill out a Freedom of Information request and get this information.

    I'm hoping soon, that someone will come right out and say that "If my neighbor is so concerned, let them go down and get the information themselves for them to have, not broadcast it to the world in an easy to read and printable shopping list."

    They never backed down after their last attempt at this:

    This was the first time in 2006

    They still think they've done nothing wrong.
  3. coolluke01

    coolluke01 Well-Known Member

    At first I was, in the same boat as most, thinking we should publish the names and addresses of those that would post the info on permit holders. It is not the high road though. If we really feel that this information could be used to cause danger or harm or is at least an invasion of privacy, then we can't in good couscous post the same info about them.

    I would respectfully ask for this info in post #102 to be taken down and not shared. When you fight with fire, someone always gets burned. I don't wish on the editors what they did to those permit holders.

    Posting the pictures of their kids is really crossing the line.
  4. Larry Ashcraft

    Larry Ashcraft Moderator Staff Member

    I agree. I've removed the link.

    Let's keep this high road folks.
  5. jrdolall

    jrdolall Well-Known Member

    This information just shows criminals which houses to avoid. Assuming criminals read this publication.
  6. Kim

    Kim Well-Known Member

    Some States do not allow the info to be public. Most are pro 2nd amendment states. The anti's love letting this happen. My State does NOT allow this to be public.
  7. MilsurpShooter

    MilsurpShooter Well-Known Member

    Here's hoping a home owner manages to stop a burglary with a legally held long gun and the crook blurts out "I didn't think any guns were here"

    I know a few of those houses, surprised their not on the map but by no means are they unarmed lol
  8. OilyPablo

    OilyPablo Well-Known Member

    The whole first amendment discussion is a very important thing, but I agree this is not such protected speech. Really a statute should be in place to keep it private.

    The worse thing to me is this newspaper published this to shame and to "warn" others that there might be gun owners in their area. The whole yellow/baiting journalistic view from on high disgusts me. :barf: Frankly it reminds me of some really bad government controlled media with an overt crackdown by dividing those that have from those that don't and we know who the bad eggs are.
  9. tigeroldlone

    tigeroldlone Well-Known Member

    gun owner name on internet

    I'm not sure I would dislike my name and address posted unless I was liberal politician up for re- election soon.
  10. Hacker15E

    Hacker15E Well-Known Member

    Agreed, but, again, this is an issue that should be directed at local legislators and not at the newspaper.
  11. gym

    gym member

    As one who had a home invasion in 1979, and they had no idea that I had a gun. I would not appreciate my name being on that list. It was in Queens NY.
    I also owned a business in Queens and LI, along with Manhatten, and why would I want clients asking me about why I owned a gun. Being in the service business you don't want to loose clients for no reason.
    Their were bound to be some who would not have frequented my salon if they knew that there were armed people in there. All of the managers except one had guns.We had 5 salons. My attorney and accountant also carried guns, we dealt with cash only back then.
    That's a good enough reason for me, aside from the obvious one, like breaking in to your home to steal it.
  12. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Well-Known Member

  13. chez323

    chez323 Well-Known Member

    Here's a thought, not sure how well it will be received but instead of publishing the names of law abiding citizens who have followed the letter of the law in purchasing firearms. How about we publish a list of people who are mentally ill? How well would that be received by the liberal's? Law abiding citizens who are exercising their rights are not the problem, criminals and those who are mentally ill are. Personally, I'm not as concerned about my neighbors who own guns as I am about the ones whose mental health is questionable at best.
  14. sawdeanz

    sawdeanz Well-Known Member

    Its not just the legality of it, it is just plain unethical and biased reporting. If enough people complain they might realize the error of their ways (but probably not). At any rate citizens should get the law changed as it is in other states
  15. Lex Luthier

    Lex Luthier Well-Known Member

    Per the Blaze, some blogger posted the names and addresses of all employees of the newspaper that released that map. They were all public record, but they could not get the deets on their independent contractors. Serves them all right.
  16. RetiredUSNChief

    RetiredUSNChief Well-Known Member


    The bulk of my posting is duplicated from another I made on a similar string:

    There is a lot of bruhaha about this...and rightfully so.

    People who do this kind of stuff are doing it because of the impact that their controvertial actions will have...not because it falls under some moral obligation or right. Everybody knows it, even if they hide behind the "it's legal" excuse.

    Yes, the media has the right to do a lot because of "Freedom of Press". However there is an important thing to realize about rights:

    NO RIGHT IS ABSOLUTE. All rights have limitations on them, like it or not. This is because we cannot exercise our rights without impacting others as a society. When that impact becomes adverse to anothers rights, then that right must be limited.

    Freedom of religion does not mean one has the right to practice human sacrifice in this country, even if it's part of the religion of an individual. The right to freedom of speech does not allow one to incite riots or sedition. The right to keep and bear arms does not allow one to use them in illegal activities.

    One of my Quotes of the Week at work was "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." (Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr)

    Currently, there may not be much that can be done about the direct act of publishing that information because the laws DO make it public information.

    HOWEVER, this does not release the media from responsibility for any potential consequences of that action. If their actions can be shown to have caused someone harm, or death, then they can be held liable.

    Also, though releasing that information may have been legal, some of that information which was released MAY have been against other statutes. Such as releasing the names and addresses of those involved in law enforcement, or who have retired from that role. Even if those names were not released as "former officer Joe Schmoe", the fact that "Joe Schmoe, 1313 Mockingbird Lane" was released may still constitute a violation of such statues.

    I foresee a number of law suits directly related to the release of the information. And I also foresee a number of upcoming law suits dealing with any collateral consequences as well.

    Currently, some government officials have taken a stand against releasing any such information, backed by State Senator Greg Ball. I believe they have a good basis for doing so, even though The Journal News is crying that they can't do this.

    These officials have taken an important stand in saying that they believe the wholesale release of such information in manner in which The Journal News did is dangerous and an invasion of privacy.

    Personally, I think that this action may backfire against the liberal gun control agenda for a variety of reasons. So it may turn out to be a boon in the long run.

    In the meantime, let us pray that no harm comes to people because of these actions.
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2013
  17. toivo

    toivo Well-Known Member

    Well said, RetiredUSNChief. Unfortunately, there are already some dangerous ripples from this:

  18. RetiredUSNChief

    RetiredUSNChief Well-Known Member

    I hope some serious law suits, with sharp teeth, comes about from every such incident.

    Anybody affected needs to document the bejeebers out of everything and contact attorneys in order to make the evidence iron-clad.
  19. Hacker15E

    Hacker15E Well-Known Member

    Sounds like the argument used for the AWB.
  20. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Well-Known Member

    This have been a burr under my saddle for years, and I'll get to that, and yeah, part of this rant I have posted before.

    "Releasing names of gun permit holders endangers public, New York county clerk says", Associated Press, 3 Jan 2013.

    Putnam County, New York, clerk refuses to release pistol permit data to newspaper.

    The Journal News requested pistol permit info for the same information supplied by other counties from Putnam County, and the county clerk just said no way, he refused to release public information that could endanger the public. Public release could endanger:
    o Judges or police officers with personal permits could be located by vengeful criminals;
    o People with protective orders who have relocated to avoid threats could be located via the database by their stalkers or attackers.

    The Putnam Co. NY county clerk said if you want government information on permit holders, come down to the office and fill out the paperwork so he could have you on public record as requesting public records on another private citizen. Sounds good to me. When I wanted to research land on Brown's Mountain, I had to go to the county clerk's office and get the plat maps, last purchase price, taxes, etc., in person.

    Jana Winter, "Ex-Burglars Say Newspaper’s Gun Map Would’ve Made the Job Easier, Safer", 4 Jan 2013.

    Walter T. Shaw, 65, burglar, jewel thief, author of "License to Steal" says what the newspaper did was "insanity".

    Another link: Inmates using newspaper's gun owner map to threaten guards, sheriff says

    Well, on me you can go to the Memphis Commercial Appeal webpage on Tennessee Handgun Carry Permits


    and get this:

    Last Name BROWN
    First Name CARL
    Middle Name NAAMAN
    Birth year 1948
    County SULLIVAN
    ZIP 37664
    Issue Date 2/1/2011
    Expiration Date 4/8/2015

    Tennessee gunowners were able to pressure Memphis Commercial Appeal to remove the Street Address, even though that and TN Drivers License and Social Security Number are all "part of the public record".

    WHY? For the benefit of people like this:

    It was revealing to see how just many members of the General Assembly have carry permits. Oh, yeah, there have been all manner of violent street crimes perpetrated by state legislators roaming about with pistols in their pockets.:rolleyes:

    I have taken the database and run the name of the suspect in every report in the local paper of a gun crime or reckless use of a gun that I find. NEVER ONCE HAVE I HAD A HIT ON THE CARRY PERMIT DATABASE. That database does not warn the public of "potential threats to public safety" or people we need to give "a wide berth and/or keep their actions under close scrutiny". It does feed the paranoia of anti-gun nuts and gives them a list of people to fear, which I suppose makes some maroons happy.

    Putnam County New York considers publication of pistol permit holders a threat to public safety because, among other reasons:
    o People with protective orders who have relocated to avoid threats could be located via the database by their stalkers or attackers.

    That last one is one I have hammered on since I found out the Memphis Commercial Appeal had put up a searchable website for all Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit holders. Enough of those are people who got a permit to carry in response a death threat and who relocated to throw off stalkers, to make public release of the info endangerment to them. My sister chased off a home invader and detained his accomplice for arrest; she helped put both men in prison; if she had a carry permit, they could find that out and her new address through those websites; thank God in Tennessee under court and attorney general interpretation of the state constitution RKBA there is an absolute right to have a gun in your home for self defense without permit or license.

Share This Page